Comment: Firing up the fees

Last week the City Council, whose members are frustrated about what they consider a misuse of our public safety resources, discussed plans to start charging people for making non-emergency calls to the Fire Department.

The reasons they gave were compelling: Businesses that were the subject of repeat calls due to stuck elevators their owners failed to repair, or a laundromat that got repeat calls because its lint traps weren’t properly cleaned out, are costing the city money it can ill afford to let.

But the council’s solution is far too broad: Start charging everyone, including residents, for making non-emergency calls to the Fire Department. And I fear the consequences for someone who decides not to call the Fire Department when they should have because they’re not sure if they’ll be charged could end up being tragic.

No one wants our police and firefighters to be used as elevator repairmen, plumbers or locksmiths. But the numbers submitted to the council by the Fire Department show that they, at least, really aren’t. Last year, fewer than 2 percent of the 6,000 or so calls the department got were non-emergency calls.

The circumstances under which something gets tagged a non-emergency call are so vague that they could prompt people who can ill afford a $420 bill from the city to forgo calling in an actual emergency. For example, if someone’s basement floods and there’s a water heater that needs to be shut off, it’s an emergency call. But if no such hazard exists, expect a bill. Is it fair to expect people to remember the difference? And do we really want people to think twice about calling for help under these circumstances?

To top it off, the amount of money this change would generate, if the city abides by the mayor’s suggestion to charge non-emergency callers for an hour of the Fire Department’s time, wouldn’t even cover two weeks of overtime there (the original proposal, for a half hour of time, would cover less than a week). So what has the the city accomplished, other than teaching a handful of errant businesses a lesson – at the potential expense of others’ safety?

Other solutions are being proposed, and it could serve the council well to work with those who are proposing them to craft changes that really do cut down on calls that should be made to professional tradespeople (Robb Ratto of the Park Street Business Association, for example, suggested that businesses get one freebie and then get charged for subsequent calls). Let’s consider some options and the potential consequences of this decision before it gets made.

Alameda Tweets!

For this Twitter Tracker search widget to work you need to authorise with Twitter in "Dashboard" -> "Settings" -> "Twitter Tracker Auth".

Categories

Categories

Archives

Archives

Corrections

The Island is deeply committed to providing accurate information and will correct errors brought to our attention. We will also write corrections for any error of substance. Errors can be brought to our attention at michele@theislandofalameda.com or by calling (510) 910-7785.

Comment policy

The Island welcomes reader comments that are constructive and on-topic. Full names are requested to comment. By commenting here, you agree that The Island has the right to modify or delete any and all comments. You also agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless The Island and Affiliated, LLC, and all of its directors, officers and contractors from any and all claims. Views expressed in the comments section do not represent the views of The Island except where noted, and The Island does not guarantee the accuracy or reliability of the viewpoints or information expressed by third parties who comment on the site. You agree to use the comments section at your own risk. More on what’s not allowed here. Anyone who violates the comment policy may be barred from commenting on The Island. This comment policy is subject to change without notice. Questions or concerns or reports of inappropriate comments can be directed to michele@theislandofalameda.com.